US proposes to let Iran operate fortified nuclear site..Swiss meeting kicks off

•March 31, 2015 • Leave a Comment


Washington is considering letting Iran operate hundreds of centrifuges at a formerly secret bunker, in exchange for limiting research at other sites, US officials taking part in the nuclear talks in Geneva told AP.

Instead of uranium, any centrifuges permitted at the Fordo facility would work on isotopes used in medicine, science or industry, the officials said. In return, Iran would scale back the number of centrifuges it currently operates at the Natanz facility, and accept inspections and other restrictions

According to AP, the total number of centrifuges currently operating at Natanz is 10,000. If the leaked proposal is accepted, the combined number of centrifuges at both sites would be under 6,500. The formerly secret site at Fordo, which Iran revealed in 2009, is controversial because it is dug into a mountainside and fortified against air attacks.

Officials, who spoke to AP on condition of anonymity, said the goal since the beginning of the talks was to have the Fordo facility converted “so it’s not being used to enrich uranium.”

All of the proposed options are designed to keep Iran at least a year away from producing a nuclear weapon for the 10-year duration of the agreement, the officials said.

Meanwhile, the White House has said that the US expects “tangible commitments” from Iran, but refused to confirm the agreement would be in writing.

Led by US Secretary of State John Kerry and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif, the negotiators are trying to reach a preliminary agreement before the end of March. Deadline for the final agreement is June 30.

Ministers from six world powers are expected to hold their first full session on Monday with Iran’s foreign minister over its nuclear programme.

The deadline for reaching an agreement is Tuesday.

The essence of an emerging deal is to keep Iran at least one year away from being able to produce enough nuclear fuel for a single weapon.

Representatives from the US, Germany, France, the UK, China and Russia are at the talks in Lausanne, Switzerland.

The two sides have explored compromises in areas including the number of centrifuges used to enrich uranium that Iran could operate, and its nuclear enrichment work for medical research.

Restrictions on Iran’s nuclear work would last at least a decade, and include rigorous inspections, in exchange for an end to crippling sanctions, says the BBC’s Barbara Plett Usher in Lausanne.

Despite progress, disagreements remain on how long Iran would be subject to constraints, and on the speed of sanctions’ relief, our correspondent says.

At their meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, the other representatives will be aiming to agree on a political framework by Tuesday night that would set the stage for technical talks.

US officials said all parties have agreed to a “step by step approach” to reaching a deal, but sticking points remain.


“Washington is considering letting Iran operate hundreds of centrifuges at a formerly secret bunker, in exchange for limiting research at other sites”

favorite enemies..

“The deadline for reaching an agreement is Tuesday.”

lets see what they come up with to “feed the chooks”..


The envelopes please..time to examine those memos from Prince Charles

•March 31, 2015 • Leave a Comment

Steve Bell 13.3.14

And now for the big reveal: The envelopes, please. Yes, those ones, covered in distinctive black handwriting, with three envelopes encasing each letter, the better to ensure privacy and confidentiality.

Those are the 27 so-called “black spider memos” written by Prince Charles to various British government ministries. They are soon to be revealed to the public after a bitter 10-year legal battle between the Guardian newspaper and the British government, or as I like to think of it, the people vs. the establishment. The people won, in this case. Feel free to have a gin to celebrate.

What are the contents of these letters? Will they, as former attorney-general Dominic Grieves suggested in 2012 when he overruled a tribunal decision and kept them hidden, threaten Charles’s monarchy because of their “frank” nature? The Guardian wondered, “Are these black spider memos wholly in keeping with Charles’s constitutional role as a future monarch? Could he be exploiting his position by lobbying ministers? The trouble is, we just don’t know.”

What we do know is that the government has spent some $450,000 and 10 years fighting to keep those letters secret. I don’t know about you, but when the government clasps its hands over something, I have a profound urge to peel its fingers back. The letters will be reviewed and released at some unspecified point in the future, possibly with redactions, which is a fancy way of saying, “lavish use of black marker.”

The other thing we know is that Prince Charles has a history of wading in political waters, including advocating against the ban on fox hunting; criticizing the production of genetically modified foods; and promoting discredited alternative health practices such as homeopathy.

He loathed the design of the proposed redevelopment of the Chelsea Barracks in a historic part of London, and mentioned it to the owners of the site, the Qatari royal family, whom he happened to know. (Oddly, all the royals in the world seem to know each other.) The proposal was killed.

The people of the United Kingdom and the other Commonwealth realms of which Charles will one day be head of state, including Canada, may be hunky dory with this meddling. But first they have to know the level and nature of meddling in order to make an informed decision. This is what’s been kept carefully hidden for years, out of fear that a finger-in-the-pie Prince will be drastically less popular than his laissez-faire mother.

“Everyone is saying there’s a right to know everything. I don’t agree,” Charles told his biographer, Jonathan Dimbleby in 1994. “There isn’t a right to know at all.” Yes, that’s a quote from the future Charles III, not Charles I. It’s contained in Catherine Mayer’s enlightening new biography, Charles: the Heart of a King. The book is a balanced and largely sympathetic account, and it’s absolutely clear on one thing: Charles is a crusader for the things he believes in, mainly his view of technology as a disrupting influence, and he is not about to give that up. “To the Prince,” Ms. Mayer writes, “civilization often appears as a serpent that comes between man and primal harmony.”

Or, as a republican like journalist Nick Cohen puts it: “The Prince’s views are almost medieval in their obscurity.” (Full disclosure: I’m a republican, too.) It’s fine to have medieval views if you’re starring in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, but less helpful when wielding influence in the public sphere. Anyone who thinks Charles does not have influence is fooling himself: You only have to read Ms. Mayer’s account of the meetings he holds with cabinet ministers, the incessant letters he writes to them and the speeches he gives that are (unlike the previous examples) widely discussed.

Or you could read about the case of Edzard Ernst, professor emeritus at the University of Exeter, who believes that Charles and his advisers were responsible for silencing his research into alternative medicine. The full account of their conflict can be read in Dr. Ernst’s new memoir, A Scientist in Wonderland, but the essence is this: Dr. Ernst trained as both a medical doctor and a homeopath, spent years studying the effectiveness of alternative treatments and concluded that many, including homeopathy, were bogus.

When he criticized a study commissioned by Charles into the economic benefits of alternative remedies, he was denounced by the Prince’s staff to his superiors. The university investigated Dr. Ernst (he was cleared). But his research funds disappeared and his department was shut down. Charles had initially seemed to support his work, but as Dr. Ernst writes in his book, “To the contrary: He seemed to be a staunch advocate of unreason and a formidable opponent of any attempt to bring science or critical thinking to bear on alternative medicine.”

Are there more such stories contained in the black spider memos? We’ll only know when the British government gives in to the inevitable and hands them over, as it should have done years ago. The envelopes, please.


this family is the most powerful entity in the world alongside the vatican..and they are in these roles for no other reason but for the bloodline of their descendants..charles is a loose cannon..he uses his influence to change government policy and we are about to find out by how much..albeit with redactions all over the place..but its better than nothing..


Millionaire comedian Brand outlines vision for new chain of businesses boasting their own currency the day after being voted one of the world’s greatest thinkers

•March 31, 2015 • Leave a Comment



Comedian Russell Brand has revealed his plans for a new chain of non-profit businesses which would boast their own currency.

The left-wing activist was on the New Era council estate in Hoxton, east London, to open a new cafe today where he gave a speech – hours after he was voted one of the world’s greatest thinkers.

Brand said he will donate all money from the paperback sales of his book ‘Revolution’, to The Trew Cafe, which will be staffed by recovering addicts undergoing ‘abstinence-based recovery’.

The 39-year-old, who was joined by a crowd of 200 supporters, also accused mainstream political parties of abandoning people on inner city estates.

‘As long as you have only got parties that are interested in causing division, hatred and representing big businesses, we will create our own systems,’ he said.

‘Politics is dead, this is the end of politics. What we are discussing is what comes after, something worse or something better.’

The stand-up act added that ‘it is not a charity, it is a new business model’, describing it as a place for local people to get together and eat food grown and made in the community.

It came the day after he was named as the world’s fourth greatest thinker by readers of intellectual magazine Prospect.

The self-styled revolutionary beat the likes of Nobel peace prize winner Henry Kissinger and Booker prize recipient Hilary Mantel to make it into the top ten list of influential minds.

In its latest edition, Prospect described Brand as ‘the spiritual leader of Britain’s disaffected anti-capitalist youth’, but it has since faced backlash for including the anarchist on social media.

Drayton Bird ‏wrote on Twitter: ‘Beyond parody: if this wag is a great thinker, my vote goes to Peppa Pig.’

Tim Walker added: ‘A generation or so ago, Bertrand Russell was considered to be a great thinker. Now, comically, it’s Russell Brand.’

The television and radio presenter lost his BBC Radio 2 slot over prank calls to actor Andrew Sachs in 2008.

Since then the millionaire attempted to re-brand himself as an anti-capitalist revolutionary, but it has been mired in doubt as celebrities including Simon Cowell accused him of hypocrisy.

He accused the comedian of accepting large Hollywood film salaries whilst campaigning against the UK political system.

Despite resembling the corporeal manifestation of an absinthe hallucination experienced by Charles Dickens in 1861, Russell Brand has apparently made quite a name for himself with the rebellious British youth of late. In the past couple of years, Brand has embarked upon a radical reinvention from a mildly irritating Cockney caricature in movies you would only watch on a plane to a populist rabble-rouser and political pundit who is quickly becoming a force on the British left.

That—and presumably not Get Him To The Greek—is the reason why the self-proclaimed “leading magazine of ideas” Prospect has ranked him No. 4 on their list of the most influential public intellectuals in the world today. (Also, being smarty-pants types, they probably knew it would get them a lot of press.) Brand ranks between The Shock Doctrine author Naomi Klein and Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman on the list, which is pretty impressive for someone who has been nominated for, but never won, a Teen Choice Award. In its writeup about Brand, Prospect describes him as “the spiritual leader of Britain’s disaffected anti-capitalist youth..Dismissed by his opponents as a clownish opportunist, he is nevertheless the most charismatic figure on Britain’s populist left.”



the world thinker award is pure simon cowell says..yeah im quoting simon cowell..ironic isnt it?

“Simon Cowell accused him of hypocrisy.

He accused the comedian of accepting large Hollywood film salaries whilst campaigning against the UK political system.”

and as for prospect magazine who chose him as number 4 in the world:

“Prospect described Brand as ‘the spiritual leader of Britain’s disaffected anti-capitalist youth”


but this is a group who considered kissinger for a top 10 spot!

he is a gatekeeper..the alex jones of the uk..dont fall for his hypocrisy..

a new currency eh?..sounds familiar..


China unveils lightweight 3D-printed car

•March 31, 2015 • Leave a Comment


Chinese engineers have unveiled their country’s first 3D-printed car.

The 3.6-metre long (11.9ft) and 1.63-metre (5.5ft) wide vehicle was made within five days using low-cost composite materials in south China’s Hainan Province.

Chief designer Chen Mingqiao said the two-seater convertible “features high strength and toughness”.

“The density of the material is much lighter than that of the metal, only one-seventh or one-eighth.

“Lighter weight will help save energy in the future.”

The vehicle is powered by rechargeable batteries and can reach a maximum speed of 40 kilometres (24 miles) an hour.


small article..big news..china makes its first 3D car..the 3D revolution continues unabated..


Cambridge University conference told: “Paedophilia is natural and normal for males”

•March 31, 2015 • 2 Comments



“Paedophilic interest is natural and normal for human males,” said the presentation. “At least a sizeable minority of normal males would like to have sex with children … Normal males are aroused by children.”

Some yellowing tract from the Seventies or early Eighties, era of abusive celebrities and the infamous PIE, the Paedophile Information Exchange? No. Anonymous commenters on some underground website? No again.

The statement that paedophilia is “natural and normal” was made not three decades ago but last July. It was made not in private but as one of the central claims of an academic presentation delivered, at the invitation of the organisers, to many of the key experts in the field at a conference held by the University of Cambridge.

Other presentations included “Liberating the paedophile: a discursive analysis,” and “Danger and difference: the stakes of hebephilia.”

Hebephilia is the sexual preference for children in early puberty, typically 11 to 14-year-olds.

Another attendee, and enthusiastic participant from the floor, was one Tom O’Carroll, a multiple child sex offender, long-time campaigner for the legalisation of sex with children and former head of the Paedophile Information Exchange. “Wonderful!” he wrote on his blog afterwards. “It was a rare few days when I could feel relatively popular!”

Last week, after the conviction of Rolf Harris, the report into Jimmy Savile and claims of an establishment cover-up to protect a sex-offending minister in Margaret Thatcher’s Cabinet, Britain went into a convulsion of anxiety about child abuse in the Eighties. But unnoticed amid the furore is a much more current threat: attempts, right now, in parts of the academic establishment to push the boundaries on the acceptability of child sex.

A key factor in what happened all those decades ago in the dressing rooms of the BBC, the wards of the NHS and, allegedly, the corridors of power was not just institutional failings or establishment “conspiracies”, but a climate of far greater intellectual tolerance of practices that horrify today.

With the Pill, the legalisation of homosexuality and shrinking taboos against premarital sex, the Seventies was an era of quite sudden sexual emancipation. Many liberals, of course, saw through PIE’s cynical rhetoric of “child lib”. But to others on the Left, sex by or with children was just another repressive boundary to be swept away – and some of the most important backing came from academia.

In 1981, a respectable publisher, Batsford, published Perspectives on Paedophilia, edited by Brian Taylor, a sociology lecturer at Sussex University, to challenge what Dr Taylor’s introduction called the “prejudice” against child sex. Disturbingly, the book was aimed at “social workers, community workers, probation officers and child care workers”.

The public, wrote Dr Taylor, “generally thinks of paedophiles as sick or evil men who lurk around school playgrounds in the hope of attempting unspecified beastliness with unsuspecting innocent children”. That, he reassured readers, was merely a “stereotype”, both “inaccurate and unhelpful”, which flew in the face of the “empirical realities of paedophile behaviour”. Why, most adult-child sexual relationships occurred in the family!

The perspectives of most, though not all, the contributors, appeared strongly pro-paedophile. At least two were members of PIE and at least one, Peter Righton, (who was, incredibly, director of education at the National Institute for Social Work) was later convicted of child sex crimes. But from the viewpoint of today, the fascinating thing about Perspectives on Paedophilia is that at least two of its contributors are still academically active and influential.

Ken Plummer is emeritus professor of sociology at Essex University, where he has an office and teaches courses, the most recent scheduled for last month. “The isolation, secrecy, guilt and anguish of many paedophiles,” he wrote in Perspectives on Paedophilia, “are not intrinsic to the phenomen[on] but are derived from the extreme social repression placed on minorities …

“Paedophiles are told they are the seducers and rapists of children; they know their experiences are often loving and tender ones. They are told that children are pure and innocent, devoid of sexuality; they know both from their own experiences of childhood and from the children they meet that this is not the case.”

As recently as 2012, Prof Plummer published on his personal blog a chapter he wrote in another book, Male Intergenerational Intimacy, in 1991. “As homosexuality has become slightly less open to sustained moral panic, the new pariah of ‘child molester’ has become the latest folk devil,” he wrote. “Many adult paedophiles say that boys actively seek out sex partners … ‘childhood’ itself is not a biological given but an historically produced social object.”

Prof Plummer confirmed to The Sunday Telegraph that he had been a member of PIE in order to “facilitate” his research. He said: “I would never want any of my work to be used as a rationale for doing ‘bad things’ – and I regard all coercive, abusive, exploitative sexuality as a ‘bad thing’. I am sorry if it has impacted anyone negatively this way, or if it has encouraged this.” However, he did not answer when asked if he still held the views he expressed in the Eighties and Nineties. A spokesman for Essex University claimed Prof Plummer’s work “did not express support for paedophilia” and cited the university’s charter which gave academic staff “freedom within the law to put forward controversial and unpopular opinions without placing themselves in jeopardy”.

Graham Powell is one of the country’s most distinguished psychologists, a past president of the British Psychological Society and a current provider of psychology support services to the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the National Crime Squad, the Metropolitan Police, Kent Police, Essex Police and the Internet Watch Foundation.

In Perspectives on Paedophilia, however, he co-authored a chapter which stated: “In the public mind, paedophile attention is generally assumed to be traumatic and to have lasting and wholly deleterious consequences for the victim. The evidence that we have considered here does not support this view … we need to ask not why are the effects of paedophile action so large, but why so small.”

But perhaps the most controversial presentation of all was by Philip Tromovitch, a professor at Doshisha University in Japan, who stated in a presentation on the “prevalence of paedophilia” that the “majority of men are probably paedophiles and hebephiles” and that “paedophilic interest is normal and natural in human males”.

O’Carroll, the former PIE leader, was thrilled, and described on his blog how he joined Prof Tromovitch and a colleague for drinks after the conference. “The conversation flowed most agreeably, along with the drinks and the beautiful River Cam,” he said.

It’s fair to say the Tromovitch view does not represent majority academic opinion. It’s likely, too, that some of the academic protests against the “stigmatisation” of paedophiles are as much a backlash against the harshness of sex offender laws as anything else. Finally, of course, academic inquiry is supposed to question conventional wisdom and to deal rigorously with the evidence, whether or not the conclusions it leads you to are popular.

Even so, there really is now no shortage of evidence about the harm done by child abuse. In the latest frenzy about the crimes of the past, it’s worth watching whether we could, in the future, go back to the intellectual climate which allowed them.

———– isnt..and we must stamp this utter bullshit out as soon as we see it and in any place we find it being pushed..this conference was like a home coming for sexual perverts..they even say they felt like they were special at the arent are the scum of the earth..

“Normal males are aroused by children.”

no..evil, sick fuckers are..take your pseudo psychology bullshit and suffocate yourself on it..


Tens of thousands march against austerity in Brussels

•March 31, 2015 • 1 Comment


Rainy weather in Brussels did not stop tens of thousands of people from protesting against austerity measures introduced by the new Belgian government. Attendance estimates from police and organizers differed sixfold.

The rally saw somewhere between 17,000 and 20,000 people on Sunday, RTFB broadcaster reported, citing police estimates. Meanwhile, march organizers claimed that up to 120,000 people participated.

The march was organized by ‘Hart boven Hard’ (Heart Over Hard).

During the demonstration, activists spoke out against budget cuts and unfair taxation policies.

“Our society has many challenges, including economy, ecology, poverty, inequality, diversity and urban development,” activist Wouter Hillaert told VTM News. “If we want to find an answer, we need to switch to a different tune than the current policy.”

Another protest is scheduled to take place in Brussels on Monday, with local labor unions organizing a wave of strikes. At least 7,000 people are expected to take part.


the marches and protests dont stop and they are not confined to a few countries..they are occurring at different times in most european countries..austerity..


Thousands of Tunisians and leaders march after Bardo attack

•March 30, 2015 • Leave a Comment





World leaders joined tens of thousands of Tunisians on Sunday to march in solidarity against Islamist militants, a day after security forces killed members of a group blamed for a deadly museum attack.

The March 18 attack on the Bardo national museum in Tunis killed 21 foreign tourists and a policeman, shaking a country that has been praised as a peaceful democratic model since leading the first of the Arab Spring uprisings in 2011.

A red-and-white sea of Tunisian crescent and star flags filled a major boulevard in the capital where several world leaders, including French President Francois Hollande, came to rally under the slogan “Le Monde est Bardo” (The World is Bardo).

“We have shown we are a democratic people, Tunisians are moderate, and there is no room for terrorists here,” said one of the demonstrators, Kamel Saad. “Today everyone is with us.”

Thousands of police and soldiers had been positioned around the capital since early morning.

One of the most secular countries in the Arab world, Tunisia has mostly avoided violence in the four years since the toppling of autocrat Zine El-Abidine Ben Ali. In contrast with Libya, Yemen and Syria which have plunged into war and chaos, it has adopted a new constitution and held free elections.

But the Bardo massacre was one of the worst attacks in its history. Japanese, Polish, Spanish and Colombian visitors were among those killed in the attack, which the government says was aimed at destroying Tunisia’s vital tourism industry.


the images of the march with hollande and his mates reminds me of this:

i bet the same tactics were used here..



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,630 other followers

%d bloggers like this: